Hi Robert, nice job, but why not using https://github.com/anael-seghezzi/CToy ?
It already have everything you need, plus hot-reload capability. Regards. ----- Mail d'origine ----- De: Robert Schlicht <tin...@rschlicht.eu> À: tinycc-devel@nongnu.org Envoyé: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 20:38:52 +0100 (CET) Objet: Re: [Tinycc-devel] TinyCC on Windows & some suggestions Yes, it is. But it’s really primitive, basically just a text editor that has the compiler integrated, and calling it an IDE may be an exaggeration. It’s the thing that is intended to make writing a “Hello, World!” program (and slightly more interesting stuff) as painless as possible for beginners. Robert Jake Anderson (2024-03-11 15:10): > Is the IDE open source? An IDE that is packaged separately and uses the TCC > compiler could be useful. > > On Sun, Mar 10, 2024 at 1:01 PM Robert Schlicht <tin...@rschlicht.eu> wrote: > > > At our university we offer a course where we program simple spatial > > simulations in various programming languages, one of them being C, for > > illustrating close-to-the-machine programming concepts. We here need a C > > implementation that is small (since it’s accessed over a network), works > > out of the box on Windows computers (since our students are beginners) and > > runs fast (so compiler errors are available instantaneously). We do not > > need advanced developer tools, and code running three times slower is > > acceptable because that is still faster than scripting languages. > > > > TCC is obviously a good option here, and for our course starting in April > > of this year, I put together a package https://rschlicht.eu/tc-ide.zip > > that includes a minimalist IDE running TCC and a very basic form of a C > > standard library, all contained in a standalone executable tc-ide.exe. The > > library is just headers that directly access the Windows API (no runtime > > needed) and should satisfy the requirements of a conforming freestanding > > implementation, while also including common memory, file, math and the > > printf family of functions. (If anyone finds this useful, I’ll gladly > > contribute it to the TCC project.) > > > > The executable is compiled by itself, although this currently requires a > > few hacks and workarounds to get it working as desired. I list these here > > as suggestions for improving TCC: > > > > (1) For using TCC as a library, it would be nice if it did a more thorough > > cleanup: > > – In a few places exit() is called in case of failure, but terminating the > > program is not very user-friendly; cleanly propagating failure or even some > > longjmp hacks might provide a better solution. [tc-ide does the latter, > > while patching function calls to keep track of memory and open files.] > > – Another problem I encountered is that TCC does not always properly > > restore the state of the global variables; compiling the following code > > fragment the first time produces an error message (as it should), but the > > second time it causes an exception (which I assume is a bug): > > void nothing(void) {for ( ; ; ) break;} void garbage(void) {switch > > [The workaround in tc-ide is ugly but straightforward: Make a copy of the > > memory block containing all global variables, and restore this block after > > TCC returns.] > > > > (2) I really appreciate that TCC can directly link to functions in Windows > > DLLs with no auxiliary .lib file and that it even supports directives like > > #pragma comment(lib,"kernel32"). The current implementation of the DLL > > lookup with a huge number of lseek & read calls (via read_mem() in tccpe.c) > > may be inefficient on some file systems. [tc-ide avoids this issue by > > creating file mappings in memory and redirecting lseek and read to those > > memory buffers, which it has to deal with anyway to access the embedded > > headers.] > > > > (3) The C23 preprocessor directive #embed would be of help for embedding > > headers and other files as byte arrays in the program. [tc-ide currently > > does this by providing a non-standard feature with a custom notation like > > #include "stdlib.h#".] > > > > (4) TCC uses fixed buffer sizes for file paths in certain places. For > > example, libtcc.c has 260(=MAX_PATH) in config_tccdir_w32() and > > _fullpath(), 1000 in tcc_add_systemdir() and 1024 in > > tcc_add_library_internal(), while tccelf.c has 1024 in getcwd(). Windows > > has been supporting long file paths for quite a while now, so it might be > > better to allocate those buffers dynamically: > > https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/fileio/maximum-file-path-limitation > > > > (5) Some rarely used C library functions could perhaps be replaced to make > > the code less dependent on such features. Examples are the single use of > > alloca() in libtcc.c to set up a buffer and the use of scanf() in tccpp.c > > to convert the TCC version string into a number. [tc-ide here provides > > stubs.] > > > > (6) It would be useful to allow the user to set the entry point symbol > > (either the one called by the OS or the one called by the startup code), > > like other compilers do. [tc-ide provides its own version of _start(), > > which simply calls main().] > > > > (7) Additional observations: > > – In tcc_new() (tcclib.c), checking the return value of tcc_mallocz is > > probably redundant. > > – In tcc_close() (tcclib.c), I do not understand why the test is ">0" > > instead of ">=0". Typically 0 is stdin, but maybe the code should not rely > > on that. > > – The protection of InitializeCriticalSection() in tcc.h is not > > thread-safe and can lead to a race condition. > > – In Windows, the semicolon ';' can appear in file names and is therefore > > perhaps not an ideal PATHSEP path separator character (despite that fact > > that it is still used in that function in the Path environment variable); a > > double null-terminated string could be a better choice. > > > > Let me conclude with a question on the licenses. As I understand it, TCC > > is licensed under LGPL, although there is also a more permissive > > RELICENSING statement, but I assume this is irrelevant due to the various > > contributions by authors not listed there. Is that so, or am I missing > > something? > > > > Robert > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Tinycc-devel mailing list > > Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org > > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel > > _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel